Agonistic Critiques of Liberalism: Perfection and Emancipation
Agonistic Critiques of Liberalism: Perfection and Emancipation
复制标题
对自由主义的激烈批判：完美与解放
DOI：
10.1057/cpt.2008.15
复制
发表时间：
2008
影响因子：
1.8
通讯作者：
T. Fossen
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
T. Fossen
痛苦主义是一种将政治定位于政治核心的政治理论。激进的理论家指责自由主义理论通过过度关注共识而使多元化非政治化。本文从规范的角度考察了对自由主义的争论性批评。我认为，多元化的论点本身不足以支持对政治的争论性解释，而是指出了进一步的规范性承诺。通过分析墨菲、霍尼希、康诺利和欧文的著作，我发现了两种规范性的斗争理论：解放主义的斗争，旨在挑战暴力和排斥，以及完美主义的斗争，旨在培养高尚。从规范的角度来看，前者提出了一个内部的挑战，自由主义，而后者构成了一个外部的挑战，自由主义提供了一个竞争的帐户的政治目的。在评估对自由主义的竞争性批评的购买时，认识到解放主义和完美主义的竞争性之间的区别是至关重要的。此外，这一分析使我们超越了立场与共识之间的简单对立。这不仅仅是一个重视真正的多元主义从而批评共识的问题;而是一个问题：政治的目的是什么？
Agonismis a political theory that places contestation at the heart of politics. Agonistic theorists charge liberal theory with adepoliticization of pluralismthrough an excessive focus on consensus. This paper examines the agonistic critiques of liberalism from a normative perspective. I argue that by itself theargument from pluralismis not sufficient to support an agonistic account of politics, but points to further normative commitments. Analyzing the work of Mouffe, Honig, Connolly, and Owen, I identify two normative currents of agonistic theory:emancipatory agonism, aimed at challenging violence and exclusion, andperfectionist agonism, aimed at the cultivation of nobility. From a normative perspective the former presents an internal challenge to liberalism, while the latter constitutes an external challenge to liberalism by providing a competing account of theends of politics. Recognition of the distinction between emancipatory and perfectionist agonism is crucial in assessing the purchase of agonistic critiques of liberalism. Furthermore, this analysis draws us beyond the simple opposition between contestation and consensus. It is not simply a question of valuing genuine pluralism and therefore criticizing consensus; rather the question comes to be: what are theendsof politics?